What's in a mechanism? Development of a key concept in realist evaluation
What's in a mechanism? Development of a key concept in realist evaluation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13012-015-0237-x
复制
发表时间：
2015-04-16
影响因子：
7.2
通讯作者：
Lhussier, Monique
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dalkin, Sonia Michelle;Greenhalgh, Joanne;Lhussier, Monique
背景：潜在的生成机制产生因果规律的想法已经成为许多社会科学和自然科学学科的指导原则。作为这种调查的一种具体形式，现实主义评估在评估复杂的社会干预方面正在获得势头。它侧重于使用背景、机制和结果配置，而不是询问干预是否“有效”，而是关注“什么管用、如何发挥作用、在什么条件下以及对谁有效”。现实主义的评估可能很难编纂，需要相当多的研究人员思考和创造力。因此，在实践中将该方法付诸实施时，往往会出现混乱。本文旨在澄清和进一步发展现实主义评估中的机制概念，并通过这样做来帮助那些操作该方法论的人学习。讨论：使用社会科学的例子，我们认为将机制的概念分解为其组成部分有助于理解干预提供的资源和这改变参与者推理的方式之间的差异。这反过来又有助于区分上下文和机制。探讨了社会科学研究中的机制“激发”的概念，并讨论了这可能如何扼杀研究人员的现实主义思维。我们强调将机制概念化的重要性，认为它是在一个连续统一体上运行，而不是作为一个‘开/关’的开关。总结：本文中的讨论有望推动现实主义方法的进步和可操作性。这一发展很可能是由于方法论的初级阶段，以及它最近在社会科学研究中日益突出和使用的缘故。我们提出的论点已经过测试，并在整篇文章中使用社会科学插图进行了解释，证明了它们的可用性和价值。
Background: The idea that underlying, generative mechanisms give rise to causal regularities has become a guiding principle across many social and natural science disciplines. A specific form of this enquiry, realist evaluation is gaining momentum in the evaluation of complex social interventions. It focuses on 'what works, how, in which conditions and for whom' using context, mechanism and outcome configurations as opposed to asking whether an intervention 'works'. Realist evaluation can be difficult to codify and requires considerable researcher reflection and creativity. As such there is often confusion when operationalising the method in practice. This article aims to clarify and further develop the concept of mechanism in realist evaluation and in doing so aid the learning of those operationalising the methodology.Discussion: Using a social science illustration, we argue that disaggregating the concept of mechanism into its constituent parts helps to understand the difference between the resources offered by the intervention and the ways in which this changes the reasoning of participants. This in turn helps to distinguish between a context and mechanism. The notion of mechanisms 'firing' in social science research is explored, with discussions surrounding how this may stifle researchers' realist thinking. We underline the importance of conceptualising mechanisms as operating on a continuum, rather than as an 'on/off' switch.Summary: The discussions in this article will hopefully progress and operationalise realist methods. This development is likely to occur due to the infancy of the methodology and its recent increased profile and use in social science research. The arguments we present have been tested and are explained throughout the article using a social science illustration, evidencing their usability and value.